Talk:Thach Weave

I changed "inferior" to "slower-turning" in the first paragraph. Throughout the entire Pacific Campaign all US fighters (and, if memory serves, all other common fighters in service anywhere else in the world) had poorer turning characteristics than the A6M Zero-sen, which was a dogfighter's fighter. Still, they were all more durable, had better dive and climb characteristics (P-40 Warhawk), had better performance at altitude (F4U Corsair), were simply faster (P-38 Lightning)... classifying aircraft as generally "inferior" is only effective when comparing apples to apples; doctrine usually plays a greater role. There's a reason why modern F-14, F-18, F-15, etc. pilots try to keep fights high and fast; if they get into even a MiG-21's flight envelope they'll lose because the "inferior" aircraft performs better at lower altitudes. --165.134.195.72 06:05, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

I added a second illustration. As a newcomer to dogfighting manoeuvres, I was a little lost as to how such a move could benefit an evading pilot. The existing illustration with four fighters (and no attacker) didn't really help. It was only when I looked at one of the references that I understood the move. All it took was a good diagram... -- Discboy 15:30, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

Those two images do not illustrate tactics right. There is a right illustration in second external link http://www.centuryinter.net/midway/appendix/appendixfourteen_usvftac.html. The idea was to to have two fighter sections on distance between them at least at a turn radius. Defending pair could shoot at enemy on first turn. --Tigga en 03:48, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

An odd place to see this

In the "Speed Racer" movie, during the first race, Speed performs a Thach Weave with his brother Rex Racer's 'ghost car' through the criss-crossing section of the track. The extreme banking makes the cars' paths just like aircraft flying. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bizzybody (talk • contribs) 06:01, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Soviet analog

Alexander Pokryshkin engaged seemingly same maneuvre, named "scissors" around 1942 on Russian-German front. However the main intention was to chain those "scissors: into "snakeys", allowing fast MiG-3 interceptors be used to convoy slow Sukhoi Su-2 bombers without outrunning them. Escorting on low power made interceptors themselves been prey to sudden attacks and protective value of scissors (both for neighbours' support and allowed high speed) was noted. On fighters missions, however, Pokryshkin, tending to vertical maneuvres rather than dogfights, that was not of much use. 4th picture might show wingman protecting his leader or perhaps example of scissors used for defense. http://www.23ag.ru/html/bloknot_1.html 212.176.32.20 (talk) 14:20, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

did it remain exclusive?

if enemy pilots encounter the Thach Weave and it's effective, wouldn't they also adopt it themselves? 68.173.49.156 (talk) 01:48, 9 February 2015 (UTC)

Speculation from my armchair, but here's what I think:

• The Thach Weave is a DEfensive tactic that offers no benefit to OFfensive actions - having your wingman 200ft abeam while you attack a bomber isn't going to give him a shot at said bomber.
• The Japanese couldn't implement it, due in part to their inability to replace lost pilots, and in part to different temperaments.
• The European theatre tended towards larger formations - three-plane Vic formation, four-plane Finger-four.
• European fighters also tended to be more similar in performance than the F4F-versus-A6M matchup, so the specific tactic wasn't necessary.

Still, I imagine that there were circumstances in which the maneuver occurred - it's just that the US Navy formalized and taught it. DeMatt (talk) 13:01, 2 December 2015 (UTC)